英语论文网

本文是一篇英语语言学论文题目，本研究结果表明，就干扰项的质量而言，在本研究使用的英语听力理解测试中，大多数干扰项的质量良好，少数失效干扰项在四种类型中均匀分布，四类干扰项的平均区分度没有显著差异。

CHAPTER ONEGENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research aims

The study aims to investigate 1)the psychometric quality of the four categories ofdistractors in the multiple-choice items of an English as a foreign language(EFL)listening comprehension test,2)and the relationship between distractor selection andlistening ability.It is hypothesized that different categories of miscomprehensionunderlie the different types of distractors,and that test takers at different ability levelsare prone to different categories of miscomprehension.

1.2 Research rationale

The multiple-choice item is among the most popular test items because of its ability tomeasure a wide range of knowledge,skills,and competencies from across a range ofdisciplines and content areas,such as the ability to comprehend concepts andprinciples,make inferences,and utilize information.A multiple-choice item iscomposed of a stem and several options(typically three to five).Among these options,the correct option is referred to as the key,and the incorrect options are referred to asdistractors.Although the multiple-choice item is popular for its objectivity,reliability,certainty and operability,it has also received many criticisms due to its controversialvalidity and strict requirement for test developers(Albano&Rodriguez,2018;Przymuszała et al.,2020;Rodriguez,2015).

A number of specialists have dedicated to the development of multiple-choiceitems,particularly the development of distractors,since the first large-scalemultiple-choice test was administered in the early 1900s(Baker,1989;Ebel,1951;Spolsky,1995).In 1989,Thissen et al.shed light on the importance of distractors inthe development of multiple-choice items in their article with a provocative title “Multiple-choice modes:The distractors are also part of the item”.Haladyna et al.(2002)classified 31 multiple-choice writing rules based on the analysis of 27 differenttextbooks on classroom assessment and 19 empirical studies.Out of the 31 guidelinesfor multiple-choice item writing,12 guidelines pertain to distractor development.Generally speaking,considering that the ultimate goal of a test is to discriminatebetween test takers of high and low ability,distractors should appear plausible tolow-ability test takers but unappealing to high-ability test takers(Haladyna,2004).Inother words,test designers should make great efforts to create plausible andfunctioning distractors,i.e.,high quality distractors(Carr,2011;Haladyna&Downing,1993;Lee&Winke,2013).

CHAPTER TWOLITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Overview

This part reviews the relevant literature mainly from two perspectives,listeningcomprehension and distractors in multiple-choice questions in EFL listening tests.Section 2.2 elaborates on listening comprehension including its definition,cognitiveprocesses involved,and learners’problems in these processes.Section 2.3 reviewsprevious studies on distractors in multiple-choice items with a focus on classification,and studies on the relationship between distractor selection and learners’ability.Section 2.4 is a brief summary.

2.2 Listening comprehension

2.2.1 Definition of listening comprehension

To define 本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。